mightandmagicfandomcom-20200222-history
Forum:Attracting new editors
So, since we lack editors, we need to update. As you can see, the background image has been changed (Hope you like it!). However, there needs to be some contests (like this) to get them around. I was thinking of maybe an role-play game in here? Anyone else has comments? Energy X ∞ 11:00, January 3, 2013 (UTC) We could have a competition to come up with a new background image :P Nah, I actually quite like the one we have with the 2 dragons fighting. On a serious note I have thought a little on this and I think we could try to gain reinforcements from some members of the heroes community though sites like Celestial Heavens. My understanding though lurking on these sites is many there are less keen on the Ubisoft continuity, but love the old universe and have knowledge on the older games which could be a real boost. If I have your permission, I could try and put a call out on these forums and see if there is anyone willing to help. A8T (talk) 19:17, January 3, 2013 (UTC) You have my permission, let's hope it works. However, maybe you are correct - maybe we could make a background competition every 2-3 months, I'm mostly out of ideas. Energy X ∞ 19:50, January 3, 2013 (UTC) Ok time for a BIG update. I have talked to one of the former admins of this site and I think I understand why there is a cronic lack of contributers. It seems most the previous members of this site had moved away to set up another M&M wiki on Celestial Heavens. Well links speak louder than words so here it is: http://www.celestialheavens.com/viewpage.php?id=1295648074 It isn't operational yet, but once its up and running we may have 2 might and magic wikis, which I don't think is an ideal situation with the best option being if we make one concentrated effort. Anyway you may want to get hold of the guy I spoke to, Pol so we can avoid a wiki clash. A8T (talk) 22:27, January 6, 2013 (UTC) I-I... am shocked at the news. They left... I can't believe. I think they might left due to Wikia enforcing rules. So can you ask them: *when did they leave, *when is their wiki going to be active, *can they come back? Energy X ∞ 23:09, January 6, 2013 (UTC) Well I can already sort of answer the first 2. *They probably left the end of 2011 by the looks of the link I have. Bear in mind that I don't think there were that many people working on it even then, so it might not have been many people that moved. What I wonder is what went on just after they left, for the first half of 2012. There were 4 admins right, and some of them were active, so maybe not everyone left? *They are not sure when it is going to be live, there is alot to work on still by the sounds of it. *Have'nt asked them that yet, but I am guessing the answer would be no given all the effort they have made in their move so far. What I thought though is we can allow them to use this wiki in the meantime to produce pages, then allow them to transfer that information accross when they have their wiki up. This would either benefit both wiki's if we decide to keep 2 up, or if we somehow merge them then we have the same information anyway. A8T (talk) 00:32, January 7, 2013 (UTC) They have the right to use wiki like anyone else does, so ehat you suggest is not bad. So yes, maybe some sort of agreement can be reached. Energy X ∞ 11:25, January 7, 2013 (UTC) Ok talked abit further and it would be a pain to transfer stuff from this wiki to the Celestial Hevens one as both sites now use different formats. Copying and pasting could work, but it is slow and painfull so people are unlikely to be bothered using this site while they wait for the CH wiki to become avaliable. I guess the best thing to do is wait until this wiki is up and decide what to do with the 2 wiki situation then. In other news I did talk to a ubisoft dev and asked a few technical canon questions that would help clear up a few fundementals about Heroes and Towns when they appear in scenarios (among other things). Do you want me to stick what I learned here or somewhere else? A8T (talk) 21:56, January 9, 2013 (UTC) :Well, you can stick what you learned here. And thanks for the work! Energy X ∞ 22:24, January 9, 2013 (UTC) :In which case: * Tavern Heroes (I.e. those heroes that can be usually found in a tavern). When these heroes are used on the map its usually intended as a gameplay element and not story canon element, unless they are explicitly referenced. So for instance Martina in the Sanctury campaign has a role in 1 or 2 maps, but if seen in other maps where seen as just another enemy hero floating about, she is simply be thought of as there for gameplay purposes. Or say in Heroes 5, Zoltan is the antagonist in Maahir's Gambit, but beyond that if seen the other places its just a generic hero used for gameplay, etc. *Jezebeth is the same Jezebeth in Heroes 5, 6 and Clash of Heroes :P *Alaric the crazy priest in the H5 expansions is not nessarily the same Alaric in Hot Pursuit. It's just a common name. *Towns! A bit of background first. As I worked on towns I noticed in H5 the same towns came up in multiple maps, and even in one case, twice in the same map (2 Nabu-Shuma's). This leads me to doubt wether some of the appearnces of towns in maps are intended as canon and just (like the heroes section I mentioned above) used for gamplay). Some of these towns appear in H6. I found out the H6 appearances of these towns are probably all canon. Don't know about the remaining towns seen in H5 but not H6. So that at least means I can say for almost certain where some of the towns are located. :A8T (talk) 23:10, January 9, 2013 (UTC) : More I wrote messages on users' talk page. Honestly, there aren't many of us left, so we need to update the small pages so that I can request the Spotlight. Energy X ∞ 19:52, January 31, 2013 (UTC) :Personally? I recommend deleting some of them. Not the pages with actual content, mind you, but the pages that only have a name and a category. Of which there are many. Looking on , you may notice there are over 2,000 pages with fewer than 50 characters on them. That means that they are just names and categories, and so nothing of value is actually on them. A lot of them are from the Might and Magic series, which is not my area of expertise, so I can't really help you with them much if you try and add to all of them. If you do, I wish you the best of luck. 20:06, January 31, 2013 (UTC) Well, that's the problem. None of us have the knowledge of the Might & Magic (not Heroes), yet just deleting them makes me feel... corrupted. It is either that or searching for people who know about that. Energy X ∞ 20:13, January 31, 2013 (UTC) :EDIT CONFLICT: I just double-checked, and yes, if you deleted every page with 49 bytes of information or fewer, we would easily fall into the "less than 925 pages with fewer than 300 bytes of information" category. :There's no reason to feel bad about deleting pages with no information on them. If there's nothing on them, then they're not worth keeping. Nothing at all is stopping someone else from coming back and making the page and adding information later. There's just no reason to have it now if we don't have the information or the people to fill out the information. 20:15, January 31, 2013 (UTC) I guess you are right. I'm saying that before I became the b'crat, Dubiel did a similar thing (though he also deleted images). Energy X ∞ 20:19, January 31, 2013 (UTC) :Yeah, I know. I think he deleted them for the same reason, though I don't pretend to really understand that whole situation, so I'll not get into it. The problem is that these pages that are completely lacking information are often for minor things, things that we, frankly, do not have the luxury of worrying about right now with our general coverage the way that it is. I mean, sure, information there would be great, but the first thing we should worry about is definitely our coverage of the important elements of the games -- factions, creatures, campaigns, important characters, not making individual pages for each artifact from every game and listing its stats out. Getting these things done and making them look good, that will bring editors to work on the details. 20:24, January 31, 2013 (UTC) I just thought I'd throw this out here: shows a list of orphaned pages - that is, pages that no other page links to. Many of these, thought not all, are empty pages - no images, no text, nothing at all. There's no reason for them to exist. Of course, not all of them are empty, and I'd check before deleting anything, but we could get down to a better number of real pages if we did.Narve (talk) 11:48, February 2, 2013 (UTC) Indeed. Most of the pages have only the categories. Hm, maybe I should make a list before, then delete the pages. I feel the list will be needed in future... Energy X ∞ 12:03, February 2, 2013 (UTC) I second that. The page names can be usefull points to use when researching older games or forgotten information. So we should definatly keep a record of them if deleting these pages. A8T (talk) 18:11, February 3, 2013 (UTC)